From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753305AbYIHNcK (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2008 09:32:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751811AbYIHNb5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2008 09:31:57 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.233]:49604 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751255AbYIHNb4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2008 09:31:56 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:references; b=GSEJRDTqRwtO+Rsg3ec4qQks9T+hODtIGbJ+/a9ETGWHsprh6fNDQ4O9enhtTaWeLL Lq4p/vUTmBlXe+jmAQB0KYu77nW+Kgk8lea82KkActXKpwrthTtAXTrWuNPArmTZxXhV sv4iW1GuFS0a76Yo6nhXNsynQhXo1i1xFOJkc= Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 15:31:55 +0200 From: "Michael Kerrisk" Reply-To: mtk.manpages@gmail.com To: "Ulrich Drepper" Subject: Re: paccept() oddity Cc: "Davide Libenzi" , "Andrew Morton" , lkml , "Linus Torvalds" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <48AC4B6E.4040409@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ulrich -- ping! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michael Kerrisk Date: Aug 29, 2008 10:45 PM Subject: Re: paccept() oddity To: Ulrich Drepper Cc: Davide Libenzi , Andrew Morton , lkml , Linus Torvalds Ulrich -- Ping! On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 6:50 PM, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > Ulrich, > > [ > 2.6.27-rc has paccept(): > > int paccept(int fd, struct sockaddr *sockaddr, socklen_t *addrlen, > const sigset_t *sigmask, int setsize, int flags) > ] > > While considering the sigset argument for paccept() (see my previous > message), and testing that system call, I realized that there is a certain > oddness in the implementation of paccept(). > > Like accept(), paccept() automatically restarts if interrupted by a signal > handler that was established with the SA_RESTART flag. > > On the other hand, pselect(), ppoll(), and epoll_pwait() are never restarted > if interrupted by a handler, even if the handler was established with > SA_RESTART. (This is the same as with select(), poll(), and epoll_wait().) > > It seems to me that it makes little sense to restart paccept(), especially > in > the case where it is interrupted by a handler for one of the signals that is > in sigmask, since the whole point of calling paccept() is to block until a > connection is received, or until one of the signals in sigmask is caught(). > > How about changing paccept() so that it is never automatically restarted if > interrupted by a signal handler, regardless of the SA_RESTART flag. (In > other words, paccept() should be consistent with pselect(), ppoll(), and > epoll_pwait(), rather than being consistent with accept().) What are your > thoughts? > > Cheers, > > Michael > > -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ man-pages online: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online_pages.html Found a bug? http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ man-pages online: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online_pages.html Found a bug? http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html